L’Arche shouldn’t pay for Jean Vanier’s sins
The stunning news that Jean Vanier engaged in coercive sexual relationships with at least six women has left his reputation as a great Canadian humanitarian in tatters.
Long revered as the founder of L’Arche International, the world’s premier network of communities for intellectually disabled people, Vanier will now, nine months after his death, be reviled as a serial sexual-abuser.
Given the damning evidence amassed against him by independent investigators, Vanier, or more precisely how he is remembered, deserves no better.
But while public condemnation seems only just for the privileged son of a former Canadian governor general, Vanier’s horrific wrongdoings should not tarnish the organization he founded. Above all, his misdeeds should not herald the end of L’Arche and all its good work.
When Vanier began L’Arche in 1964, he ignited a revolution in the way people with intellectual disabilities lived and were perceived. Rejecting the impersonal institutions so common at the time for people with such challenges, Vanier moved into a small house on the outskirts of Paris with two men who had intellectual disabilities.
Together, they created a nurturing environment where supportive relationships were formed and everyone was equally valued. In time, that model blossomed into L’Arche, which now operates more than 154 residential communities in 38 countries, Canada being one of them.
Philosopher, author, man of action and man of faith, Vanier was showered with honours, including being named a Companion to the Order of Canada and nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize.
But last May, shortly before his death at the age of 90, disturbing allegations about his sexual behaviour surfaced. Instead of ignoring the complaints, Stefan Posner, the international leader of L’Arche, hired the United Kingdom-based firm, GCPS Consulting, to probe into the matter.
The findings of that inquiry became public this week and were dispiriting as well as shocking — even in this, the #MeToo era. The investigators concluded Vanier had at least six sexual relationships with women between 1970 and 2005. Some of these relationships were abusive. All were deemed coercive and non-consensual.
Moreover, all of the victims were employed within the L’Arche community in which Vanier clearly wielded authority.
What will make Vanier’s abusive behaviour even harder for many people to comprehend is the fact that he incorporated sexual activity into what was supposed to be spiritual counselling for the women. Vanier prayed with them, then preyed on them.
It is a shame Vanier is not alive to be held accountable for his twisted, disgusting practices. In addition to the harm he caused so many individuals, he will leave countless others in the general public disappointed that a man who seemed to personify goodness and, indeed, helped so many others also hid something rotten gnawing away inside.
We do not believe this disillusionment should spread to include L’Arche. The organization bravely opted for transparency instead of obfuscation, the truth instead of denial.
It alerted the world to the inexcusable transgressions of its founder, knowing its own reputation could suffer. For this, it deserves applause. The Roman Catholic Church, which has long grappled with the sexual abuse and even crimes committed by too many of its priests, could learn from L’Arche.
As for L’Arche, it should not have to pay for the sins of its founder.